In prior art it is known that the interoperation and cooperation between radio operated devices in wireless networks is constrained by many parameters and design issues, like differences in electronic interface standards, communication protocols, radio frequencies, public regulations and legislations and vendor-specific implementations. Some classes of devices and their protocols are usually designed for use in specific fields of applications, for example within a private home environment, in metering applications, welfare technology or as part of a wireless “Internet of everything”.
Radio communication protocols can be divided in some major classes: open standards like the ones defined in European Norms (EN standards, e.g. KNX RF and Wireless M-Bus), and industry standards driven by consortiums or special interest groups (e.g. ZigBee, Bluetooth, Z-Wave and Thread). There are also other vendor-defined protocols, which may or may not have been released into the public domain (e.g. NEXA by ARC Technology). The regulating authorities behind these different protocols will normally not take any actions facilitating interoperability or cooperation between devices with different radio communication protocols, but focus on the development and deployment in the market of their own specific standards. Further, suppliers of radio-operated devices may find it commercially beneficial to introduce a new protocol instead of utilizing existing standards.
From a user perspective, these interoperation limitations appear often as being artificial and represent a problem for optimum usage of commercially available systems and devices. The users are very heterogeneous and so are their fields of application and requirements, but one common problem is that they find themselves constrained by these limits and may have to purchase solutions from several vendors operating in parallel.
Some protocols can utilize battery-less technology, using e.g. the kinetic energy in a button push, as for example certain KNX RF based switches, to transmit short burst of data. Other protocols need more energy to complete wireless data exchange and are more suitable for use with battery- or mains power supply.
Interoperation between radio-operated devices even within open standards is further challenged by norms issued by local authorities within given geographical regions matching local regulations. Examples of protocols that have adopted such local regulations are KNX RF and Wireless M-Bus. Examples are for instance:                KNX RF defines different frequencies. In Australia KNX RF uses 433 MHz while in Europe both 433 MHz and 868 MHz frequencies are used. Using KNX RF devices from an Australian vendor requires a 433 MHz based system, while the most commonly used frequency used by European vendors are 868 MHz The user may install either parallel systems, or systems, which support both frequencies in order to utilize devices from both regions.        Wireless M-Bus defines a different set of modes, which cannot interact due to differences in the physical layers of the radio devices. For instance, T-mode in Australia defines 433 MHz while T-mode in Europe defines 868 MHz.        
Even for devices using a same communication protocol, interoperation like for example a device switching on another device, may not be possible due to vendor specific attributes, implementations or ambiguous definitions in a specific standard. An example of such a standard is for example ZigBee based devices where vendors often define their own private device profile, preventing devices from other vendors to interoperate or cooperate with their devices.
A common limitation of many widely used RF protocols is that they only support interoperation with devices communicating with a same protocol through direct logical operational conformity between devices being within a specific physical radio range of each other, and supporting only point-to-(multi)point network topology for example. Transmission of radio packets from the devices is often limited to one or a few hops even when routers are introduced into a wireless network.
In prior art it is known how to arrange translation of radio communication protocols. For example, US20030158954 A1 discloses a method and apparatus for facilitating radio communications between communications systems operating on different communications protocols. The process involves receiving a first communication signal, translating the communication signal from a first protocol to a second protocol, and re-transmitting the communication signal. The communications protocols can include at least one of a data format, data timing system, coding scheme, transmission mode, and carrier frequency. A software-defined translator can be configured for receiving the communication signal, performing the protocol translation, and re-transmitting the communication signal.
US 2013/0114582 A1 disclose a method of operating a wireless mesh network system having a first wireless mesh network device supporting a first wireless mesh network device protocol. An application according to the method is supporting a second wireless mesh network device protocol, and a driver translates between the application's second wireless mesh network device protocol and the first wireless mesh network device protocol such that the application can exchange data with the first wireless mesh network device. A gateway is providing an interface to the first wireless mesh device while an application platform coupled to the gateway is supporting the second wireless mesh network device.
Another example of prior art is TI CC1350, which can be a bridge comprising a radio communication protocol translator. A description of the integrated circuit is found from the link http://www.electronicsweekly.com/news/products/micros/tiredesigns-wireless-mcus-ground-2015-02/. The circuit can handle two radios, hence operate as a bridge, but is limited to handle one radio at a time. Therefore, the bridge selects one of the two protocols before switching to the other one of the two protocols.
Therefore, there is a need of an improved radio communication system providing protocol translation between different radio communications protocols that at the same time controls and facilitate interoperation and cooperation between devices in interconnecting radio networks. It is also a need of providing a possibility to extend radio communication ranges between radio devices being located outside defined physical radio communication ranges of specific standards.